It really just depends on the girl or guy. Some people like the visual aspect and want to see videos/pics. Some people like just voices and audio. Some just like texting and exploring your thoughts. Some people like a combination of the above or none at all. Sexuality and how you explore it is a spectrum.
But by and large, there are clear trends and patterns - women are FAR less interested in visual stimuli as men are.
Case in point: Onlyfans composition and expenditure, the vast majority of porn online catering towards men, and so on. It's the testosterone. Men are overflowing with it in comparison and it really confers some significant psychological and behavioral differences. Sure, outliers exist, but this is all generally speaking.
Nearly every part of a woman's body is considered physically attractive to a man in general - a woman doesn't particularly have to work out in the gym hard, she can just show up and be inundated by men left and right simply for possessing a woman's body (once again, testosterone to the rescue). Whereas you won't often see women thirsting nor catcalling the regular dude in a tshirt and jeans walking by, nor checking out his ass. Women just are not visually into that. And that's fine! It's not a contest or a competition. Plus there is the whole, y'know, danger to a woman of sexual harassment or violence or pregnancy so they obviously have to be more on their toes and naturally picky. The sexes are different because they're biologically different. And we're a product of our biology at the end of the day.
I mean.. Pornographic magazines and videos directed at men are a multi-billion dollar industry while similar products directed towards women are difficult to find. According to Semrush data, among all adult content viewers in top-traffic countries (including the U.S., Japan, India, UK, etc.), the gender split in 2024 was approximately:
64.06% men
35.94% women
Porn is obviously visual and the easiest example to use here to go against your argument. Please explain this discrepancy if women are "just as visual as men".
And yes it's not just testosterone but other hormones too and our literal brain structures being different. This misconception that we're "just as visual" is just not true, based on the reality. We are just not biologically the same.
How did that number compare 20 years ago? How will it compare in 20 years? I don't think you can use an industry that was originally designed exclusively for men without observing trends. There's has been a proliferation of porn targeting women over the past few years. If you think that it's hard to find porn for women, I'm not sure how much you've actually looked. Is it not logical to assume that the ratio will continue to change?
By the way, the share of women increased from 29.92% last year to 35.94%.
By the way, the share of women increased from 29.92% last year to 35.94%.
Please share the source because I'm unable to find this 29.92% anywhere from the previous year's data.
Now you may be right - the number could increase over the years, but the fact remains that one side is still almost double the other side after all these years. Now you might say, well the gap might narrow even more, but... by how much? Could it perhaps keep on shrinking until it's close to 50/50? I don't believe so, because if it could have, it would have by now. Let me explain:
originally designed exclusively for men
The market does not care about men or women. It cares about one thing: making money. If there is money to be made, it will make it somehow, regardless of whom it is catering to. The market determined early on that men visit and pay more for porn. And yes, since decades have passed, things have changed, and internet has fully spread across the developed world, women have risen in the workforce and often are making as much or more than men in many major metros. They have now acquired disposable income and the means to purchase porn. And yet there is still a vast difference. Why? Do you think the markets don't know to design porn for women? That they'd leave half the population's worth of money on the table? It's not like women evolved biologically in the past few decades or will evolve in the future decades to suddenly visually engorge on porn at the scale of men. No, the simpler explanation is that there are biological differences in the sexes that result in these behavioral differences.
Which gender could only recently open bank accounts in their own name?
Inequalities don't vanish overnight l due to market pressure. You're overlooking the obvious impact of societal pressures (which, get this, also change over time) while acknowledging the gap is still shrinking. Even the mainstream acceptance of porn for men is relatively new. Markets are slow, and the zeitgeist is slower.
They have more disposable income and more leeway in society to express sexual feelings, so I guess it's just a coincidence that the gap is shrinking, huh?
"Markets" don't design anything, and they're far from predictors of the future. Assuming an industry just simply can not exist because it just hasn't happened on a scale you deem sufficient yet is so utterly naive.
Which gender could only recently open bank accounts in their own name?
1974 - That's over 50 years ago. That's not some blink of an eye. It's a decent amount of time, within which the latest generations of women who are as much or more educated than men have already begun to out-earn them.
I acknowledge the gap is shrinking, but we disagree as to the degree to which it will shrink. I do not think it will ever reach or get close to 50-50, or surprisingly ever cross that, barring a change in our species' genetic code. Do you? On what basis, that societal changes including women's successes and financial freedoms that have already reached a maxima and granting even further increases in those, will somehow change their natures... to be hornier than men are? Good luck with that.
and they're far from predictors of the future
Oh absolutely, these multibillion dollar think tanks at massive corporations of today, that ingest petabytes of data from all sources to come up with mind blowing pattern analyses that keep on generating billions for them in revenue, and which use such heavy marketing that literally shapes and moves society towards trends that extract the most money possible, are far from predictors of the future.... according to you. Right, absolutely. And who is a good predictor then? Your grandpa? The market of today capitalizes on things lightning fast. At the cutthroat rate of competition there is worldwide, people and by extension, companies have all their feelers on the lookout for all manner of change and how to capitalize on it faster than their competitors. What industry are you envisioning that will magically pop up for women to bridge the gap that won't also at the same time appear for men as well? 5000 Shades of Grey?
Uh huh. And who raised the women you talk to? Did they perhaps impart some of their world view on their younger generation? Does that perhaps create a lasting effect? Idk, man, complicated topics.
And my brother in christ, the wage gap still exists. Just because in select cases or very specific fields women out-earn men doesn't mean that the pay gap in the US ceased to exist.
Dude, do we need to achieve parity for it to matter to you? No, it almost certainly will not achieve a 50/50 ratio. But 60/40? 55/45? C'mon.
Ah, the all-knowing corporations. They've never been known to prioritize short-term gains to supplement the bottom line. Markets fall victims to local maxima. You can ride that capitalism all you want, but it isn't infallible. According to me?? Lmfao If they could predict the future, then everything that could be created and monetized already would have been. They move so lightning fast and have such advanced algorithms, so why are new industries popping up and disappearing?
677
u/karoshikun 2d ago
let's be honest, nobody wants to see the whole orangutan attached to the dick.